Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

A COMPARISON OF GROUND GRID MESH

DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION FOR 500KV
SUBSTATION USING IEEE 80-2000 AND FINITE
ELEMENT METHODS
Muhammad Usman Cheema1,MBilal Cheema2,Adnan Bashir3,M Usman Aslam4
Electrical Engineering Department, University of Engineering & Technology
Lahore,Pakistan1
Electrical Engineering Department, Bahria University Islamabad, Pakistan2
Electrical Engineering Department, University of Engineering &Technology
Lahore,Pakistan3
Electrical Engineering Department, University of Engineering & Technology Lahore
Pakistan4

Abstract:

An Air Insulated substation is chosen for the analysis located in Pakistan. The protective
scheme installed in any substation should be fully active to ensure its proper and accurate operation in
case of any fault. Ground Grid mesh used under substation ground consist of horizontal conductors
connected with vertical rods. The function of mesh is to dissipate extremely high current generated in
any scenario related to fault. In this regard, firstly 500KV substation is chosen for analysis of protection
scheme with focus especially on Ground Grid mesh. The analysis of mesh is carried out using both
IEEE 80-2000 and Finite Element Methods for the evaluation of important ground grid mesh
parameters. A Software is used for analysis i.e. ETAP -12 having more enhanced features than
previous versions. The problems regarding existing functioning ground grid mesh are brought to light
in one case study. In second Case study, the remedies for the rectification of mesh are provided. In
third, case study a new ground mesh is designed for the existing substation considering new
methodologies and latest analysis techniques. In fourth case study, a new ground mesh for Ultra High
Voltage Substation is designed for 750KV substation. Finally, a inter comparison is done between mesh
designed using IEEE 80-2000 and FEM methods to effectively establish the efficiency and effectiveness
of each method by each Case study. A recommendation is given regarding the best method to be used
for the future designing of ground grid mesh of all AIS substations.

Key Terms:

Electrical Transient Analysis Program, National Transmission and Dispatch Centre,

Potential Ground Rise, Ground grid System

1. Introduction
The appropriate explanation of grounding described as link created intentionally or
unintentionally along live apparatus /part which itself connects to electrode laid at suitable depth
below substation ground and it functions as earthing electrode.

DOI : 10.14810/elelij.2015.4111

131

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

The scheme used for HV systems grounding is solidly grounded structure [1, 2].The value of
resistance among ground earth and neutral of system is retained at low level as it is difficult to
attain zero value. The current due to ground fault peaks at a high level which is damaging. The
problems like stress due to high fault currents do not arise often.
The insulation related problems are the major concern in high voltage systems but in system
grounded properly by employing solid grounded scheme, upon line and ground fault occurrence
voltage does not rise massively across healthy phases. The fault current value for 500KV system
is 40-45KA and for 750KV system value is between 60-70KA.
The protective scheme design is an important aspect in design and construction of substation.
The voltage gradients are created across ground mesh and points linked to earth as reference [3].
The difference in potential is kept within the limits provided by IEEE and it is continuously
monitored for the equipment proper functionality and people safety working in surrounding.
The vital factors required for ground grid mesh evaluation are GPR,Voltage StepVs,Voltage
StepVt, Resistance of Ground Rg , Voltage MeshVm,ESP & Potential Absolute. There are
various methods available for designing of ground mesh for substation. IEEE 80-2000 and FEM
methods are adopted for mesh designing in research conducted as these are more reliable ones.
The collection of data is carried out for 500 KV substation by making use of new available IEEE
81 methods. The mesh modeling is carried out and analysis is performed by each methods
mentioned above. The GGS module in ETAP-12 data is used for ground grid mesh modeling.
The inter-comparison of FEM & IEEE 80-2000 results is done of various case studies developed
on existing ground grid mesh to establish the effectiveness in terms of cost& efficiency of each
method. The recommendations are made regarding the methods upon which the future designing
of ground grid mesh for substations may be based upon.

1.1 IEEE 81 2013 Methods

IEEE has provided latest set of methods for measurement of various potentials, resistivity and
ground resistance [3,4].These methods are called IEEE 81 methods launched in 2013.The main
aim for the development of these methods was to eradicate the deficiencies in various
measurement techniques used for collection of practical data from the site where ground grid
mesh is about to be constructed or from area where ground grid mesh is already laid and
functioning. The remedial actions were related to false measuring techniques, errors related to
the equipment and human errors readings slip-ups.
These all things were taken into account by a committee formed to address these problems. The
recommendations were forwarded by the committee to the council and upon those proposals
IEEE 81 methods were adopted.
IEEE 81-1983 methods were previously utilized used for soil resistivity and resistance before
making use of IEEE 81 standard. All measurements are taken by making use of IEEE 81 methods
in current project & afterwards further modeling is done based on available data.

132

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

1.2 Resistivity of Soil Measurement

The ground mesh design is difficult practice comprising numerous stages. The data collection of
area substation is to be created is an important part. A comprehensive test is carried out during
data collection phase for information like layers in number, soil type, resistivity of soil and soil
stratification whether soil is horizontally or vertically stratified [2, 3].
The soil resistivity is calculated by using methods given as:
A.Schlumberger
B.Three Point Driven Rod
C.four Point
D.wenner
The resistivity calculation can be made by any one of above method but Driven Rod/3 point is
consistent method adopted for soil resistivity calculation shown in figure 1.
In this method, the depth Lr of the driven-rod located in the soil to be tested is varied. The
other two rods, known as reference rods are driven to a shallow depth in a straight line. The
location of the voltage rod is varied between the test rod and the current rod. Alternately, the
voltage rod may be placed on the side opposite the current rod. The apparent resistivity is given
in equation 1.
. eq 1

Where Lr = Rod Length in meters, d =RodDia in meters

Figure 1 Three Point Driven Rod-Method

1.3 IEEE 80-2000 Methods

The 80-2000 methods for calculation of Ground Resistance provided below:
I. Newman-Laurent
II. Shevrak
133

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

1.3.1 Newman-Laurent Methods

The soil resistance varies directly with resistivity change. The main objectiveis to approximate a
depth defined h at which resistance is minimum [3, 4].
The method estimates ground resistance by making use of eq2.

+



Rg = .




eq 2

La = Conductors length meters,Nr = Vertical rods used

Ls can be calculated by equation3
Ls= La + Nr. H .. eq3
1.3.2 Sevrak Methods
It is an advance version of Newman- Laurent method incorporating some changes. It is latest
version of Newman Method. The adjustment in ground resistance value for surface of soil is
carried out for accuracy and improvement of resistance. The deepness of grid has substantial
effect on ground resistance calculation. The grid depth effect on resistance was incorporated in
existing data. eq 4 provides the formula after necessary modifications.


Rg = . [  +


. 1






 ]eq 4

La = Conductors Length (m),Ag = Ground grid area

1.4 Finite Element Methods

The Finite Element method is one of the more reliable methods of finding ground grid mesh
resistance. The resistance found is fairly close to the actual value, compared to one calculated
using conventional measurement methods.
In previous FEM methods, which are outdated now includes analysis of current by making use of
potential grid set. After the determination of current, the ground resistance was calculated by
dividing the known voltage with the calculated value of current. The drawback of this method
was to select model considering that distance of earth to be considered was starting from the
grounding grid. The main advantage of this method is selecting the size of the model such as
distance of earth under consideration is starting from the grounding grid. Since analysis of each
potential in the soil for a selected point is considered from grounding grid to the point [5].
The new FEM methods are available developed by researches with shortcomings in previous
methods removed. FEM methods are developed by researchers such as main disadvantage of old
FEM method are overcome. In new FEM methods, modeling starts from beginning. In the first
step, they assume that grounding resistance is such a parameter which does not depend on
potential or current in the grid except frequency cases other from frequencies [6,7] (50Hz or
60Hz frequency of power). The second assumption is to consider the whole region as flat surface
which is infinite.
The formulas for calculations of Resistances are given below as:
R=R1+R2 ..eq4
134

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Where R is the combined resistance sum of resistances of two portions of the flat surfaces
R2 is calculated from formula given in equation 5.
R2 = 

.!

..eq5

The R1 is found calculated with eq6.

R1 =

"#$%& '(()*+%,
eq6
-#.+*% / -#.*+%

The potential called actual voltage is found with eq 7.

Vavg= Ifault. R ..eq7
The boundary voltage is found with eq 8.
V avg= If. R2 .eq8

2. Practical Data Collected

The practical Air Insulated 500KV substation is chosen for the analysis of protection scheme.
Ground Grid Mesh of substation will be evaluated to highlight the various essential parameters
that are related to developed potentials around the mesh and ground mesh resistance.
The Air Insulated 500KV substation is shown in figure 2.

Figure 2 Air insulated Substation

The ground grid mesh modeling incorporating horizontal conductors and vertical rods is shown in
figure3 and the practical data of grid is provided in Appendix-A.

135

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Y-Direction
Conductors/Rod
s

X-Direction Conductors/Rods

Figure 3 Ground Mesh designed in ETAP

3. Case Studies Comparison using IEEE80-2000

2000 & FEM Methods
A strategy is adopted regarding Case Studies comparison in wh
which
ich the ground grid mesh is
compared using IEEE 80-2000
2000 & FEM methods. With the help of results & material consumption
for the establishment of mesh using each methodology, the efficiency &effectiveness
eness of each
method is established [8,9].
Case Study-II IEEE & FEM Comparison
The Case study-II is based on the amendments made in existing functioning ground mesh to limit
the potentials and temperature rise within the safe limits. The input parameters are provided in
table I.
TABLE I. GR
GROUND MESH INPUT DATA CASE I

Parameters
Length Grid
x-direction
irection
y-direction
irection
Number of
x-direction
irection
Conductor
y-direction
irection
ConductorsType
Conductor Depth
Conductors Size
Number of Rod
Number of Rod
Rod Diameter
Length of Rod

IEEE 80-2000 Methods

144
100
20
16
Soft DrawnCopper
Annealed
0.3
185
54
Steel RodCopper Clad
1.52
2

FEM Methods
144
100
25
20
Soft DrawnCopper
Copper
Annealed
0.3
185
57
Steel RodCopper
Copper Clad
1.56
2

136

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

The results of IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods are given in table II with all potentials meeting the
limits.
TABLE II. CASE-I COMPARISON RESULTS
Case
Study
Case
Study-I

Methods

Step Voltage

IEEE80-2000
FEM Methods

1311.1
1380.1

Touch
Voltage
1556.7
1248.1

GPR
10139.7
9287.5

Ground
Resistance
0.392
0.37

The graphs for Step, Touch& Absolute Potential are given in figure 4, 5 & 6.

Figure 4 Step Potential

Figure 5 Touch Potential

137

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Figure 6 Absolute Potential

Case Study-II IEEE & FEM Comparison

The Case study-II is based on planned enhancement in substation level of fault from existing
value of 40KA to 45 KA. The enhancement is due to replacement of old transformer with new
large capacity power transformer.[10] The effect is taken into account in case study with analysis
made with both methodologies and necessary amendments are suggested based on each method.
The input parameters are provided in table III.
TABLE III. GROUND MESH INPUT DATA CASE -II

Parameters
X-Direction
Grid Size Length
y-direction
Number of Conductor

x-direction
Y-Direction

Conductors Type
Conductors Depth
Conductors Size
Number of Rod
Number of Rod
Rod Diameter
Length of Rod

IEEE 80-2000 Methods

144
100
22
19
Soft Drawn Copper
Annealed
0.3
185
65
SteelRodCopper Clad
1.61
2

FEM Methods
144
100
29
26
Soft DrawnCopper
Annealed
0.3
185
60
Steel RodCopper Clad
1.63
2.1

The results of IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods are given in table IV.

138

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

TABLE IV. CASE-II COMPARISON RESULTS

Case
Study
Case
Study-II

Methods
IEEE80-2000
FEM Methods

StepVoltage

Touch
Voltage

GPR

Ground
Resistance

1747.3

1307.3

11332.8

0.39

1538.9

1323.6

10677.1

0.367

The graphs for Step, Touch and Absolute Potential are given in figure 7,8 & 9.

Figure 7 Step Potential

Figure 8 Touch Potential

139

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Figure 9 Absolute Potential

Case Study-III IEEE & FEM Comparison

The Case study-III is based on re-designing of whole substation grounding scheme using latest
optimization techniques based on IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods as latest advancement in
technology has led to improvement in overall ground mesh designing [11,12].The input
parameters are provided in table V.
TABLE V. GROUND MESH INPUT DATA CASE-III

Parameters
Length Grid
x- direction
y-direction
Conductor Number
x-direction
y-direction
ConductorsType
Depth of Conductors
Size of Conductors
Number of Rod
Number of Rod
Rod Diameter
Length of Rod

IEEE 80-2000 Methods

120
83
22
12
Soft DrawnCopper
Annealed
0.7
185
42
Copper Clad SteelRod
1.6
2

FEM Methods
120
83
26
22
Soft DrawnCopper
Annealed
0.5
240
50
Copper Clad Steel Rod
1.56
2.5

The results of IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods are given in tableVI.
TABLE VI.CASE-II COMPARISON RESULTS

Case Study

Methods

StepVoltage

Touch Voltage

GPR

Case StudyIII

IEEE80-2000
FEM Methods

981.5
1218.7

1295.8
1329.8

12053.8
10367.2

Ground
Resistance
0.466
0.438

The graphs for Step and Absolute Potential are given in figure 10,11, & 12.

140

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Figure 10 Step Potential

Figure 11 Touch Potential

Figure 12 Absolute Potential

141

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Case Study-IV IEEE & FEM Comparison

The Case study-III is based on new 750 KV mesh of substation to be included in system in
future. The soil characteristics obtained for 500KV substation will be used for further designing
of 750KV substation. The designing will be based on IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods
incorporating optimization techniques.
The input parameters are provided in table VII.
TABLE VII. GROUND MESH INPUT DATA CASE-IV
Parameters
Length Grid
Conductor Number

IEEE 80-2000 Methods

150
70
30
22

x-direction
y-direction
x-direction
y-direction

Conductor Type

Soft DrawnCopper Annealed

Conductors Depth
Conductors size
Number of Rod

0.8
240
42

Number of Rod

steelRodCopper Clad

Rod Diameter
Length of Rod

2.1
2.5

FEM Methods
150
120
31
37
Steel RodCopper
Clad
0.8
240
100
SteelRodCopper
Clad
1.6
2.3

Results of IEEE 80-2000 & FEM methods are given in table IV.
TABLE VIII.CASE-IV COMPARISON RESULTS

Case Study

Case Study4

StepVoltage

Touch
Voltage

IEEE80-2000

1090.9

1319.1

FEM Methods

1150.3

1525.5

Methods

GPR

Ground
Resistance
Rg

14899.
9
11843.
1

0.33
0.318

The graphs for Step, Touch and Absolute Potential are given in figure 13, 14 &15

142

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

Figure 13 Step Potential

Figure 14 Touch Potential

Figure 15 Absolute Potential

143

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015

4. Recommended Analysis Methodology

The case studies results show that ground mesh structure cost for solution provided by IEEE 802000 methods is less than one designed using FEM methods.
The reason behind the increase cost by FEM is incorporation of number of conductors and rods
used for mesh structure. The horizontally laid conductors surface area is significantly more in
mesh designed by FEM. The vertical rod diameter also exceeds the diameter of rods used in 802000 methods [12, 13, 14].The lower soil layer effect is also included in mesh designed by FEM
methods. The proper grounding requirement increases by further lower layer inclusion in design
eventually resulting in increase in material consumption for keeping parameters within limits.

5. Conclusions
The analysis of mesh was performed with both FEM and 80-2000 methods and also a new
ground grid mesh for UHV (750KV Substation) was designed. Latest version of ETAP-12 was
used for the verification of results. It can be concluded form obtained results that cost of mesh by
FEM remains greater from mesh designed with 80-2000.
First time structure cost will be more for mesh designed by making use of FEM methods but the
mesh designed will be more durable, long life and withstand the excessive fault currents more
efficiently. The main complications in mesh often come after eight to ten years. The issues are
met more in80-2000 designed mesh. The under designing is the major issue in problematic
ground meshes.
Keeping in view future requirements after passage of eight to ten years substations life, mesh
degradation occurs and various potentials surpasses limits. It is essential that proper designing of
system is carried out using right set of methods to accommodate new requirements and mesh
degradation.FEM methods may be used for future designing of mesh.

Acknowledgements
The Content presented in the paper is part of Research work carried out by Muhammad Usman
Cheema for thesis project in connection with partial fulfillment of MSc in Electrical Power
Engineering from UET Lahore Pakistan and data submitted to Higher Education Commission
Pakistan

References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]

The New IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronic Terms, IEEE Std. 100, USA, 1992.
IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding,ANSI/IEEE Std. 80 (2000). IEEE Society, New
York.
IEEE Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground Impedance and Earth Surface Potentials of a
Grounding System IEEE Std 81-2012/2013.
SangameswaraRaju, GudlaPardhasaradhi, Optimal Design Planning of Ground Grid for Outdoor
Substations in MEA's Power Distribution Substation, Journal of
Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) May-Jun 2012.
144

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015
[5]

[6]

[7]
[8]

[9]

[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]

M.G. Unde, B.E. Kushare, Dr. VithalraoVikhePatil, Grounding grid performance of substation in
two layer soil-a parametric analysis, International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Emerging
Technologies, Feb 2012
Puttarach,N. Chakpitak, T.Kasirawat and C.Pongsriwat,Substation Grounding Grid Analysis with
the Variation of Soil Layer Depth Method IEEE PES International Conference Power Tech ,
Lausanne, Switzerland, July 2007.
O.P. Rahi1, Abhas Kumar , Shashi Gupta &ShilpaGoyal Design of Earthing System for a
Substation,International Journal of Advanced Computer Research, December2012.
AttPhayomhom, SompornSirisumrannukul, Tirapong and ArwutPuttarach Safety Design Planning
of Ground Grid for Outdoor Substations in MEA's Power distribution system,ECTI
transactions on electrical engg, electronics and communications ,February 2011
S.Ghoneim, H.Hirsch, A. Elmorshedy, R.Amer, Improved Design of Square Grounding Grids,
International Conference of Power System Technology, Powercon 2006, Chongqing, China, Oct.
2006.
E. Bendito,A.Carmona, A.M.Encinas, The External Charges Method in Grounding Grid Design
Xun Long ,MingDong, WilsunXu, Online Monitoring of Substation Grounding Grid Conditions
Using Touch and Step Voltage Sensors, IEEE transactions on smart grid, vol. 3, no. 2, june 2012
Y.L. Chow, M.M.A. Salama, A Simplified Method for Calculating the Substation Grounding Grid
Resistance IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No. 2.
Dwarka Prasad, H.C. Sharma," Significance of Step and Touch Voltages ", (IJSCE) ISSN: 22312307, Volume-1, Issue-5, November 2011.
Chae-kyun Jung, Jong-kee Choi and Ji-won Kang, A Study on Effects of Grounding Systems on
Transient Voltages in154kV Substation IEEE T&D Asia 2009

Appendix
The table of containing substation data is provided below:

Sr.
No
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Description of Parameter
Level of Voltage
Maximum Fault Current
Ground Grid Mesh Area
Ground grid mesh Horizontal Distance
Ground grid mesh Vertical distance
Horizontally Installed Conductors
Vertically installed Conductors
Conductors Area
Conductors Type
Maximum Temperature of conductors
Rods installed in vertical Direction
Rod Diameter of Vertical Rods
Rod
Duration of fault
Temperature Outside
Temperature of Rod
X/R ratio Reactance over Resistance
Person Weight
soil Type at surface
Resistivity

Value
500KV
40KA
144 x 100 m2
144m
100m
14
10
185mm2
Copper annealed Soft Drawn
50 C
50
1.2 centimeter
steel Rod Copper clad
1 second
-5- 50 C
50 C
50
50 kg
gravel
9976 .m
145

Electrical and Electronics Engineering: An International Journal (ELELIJ) Vol 4, No 1, February 2015
21.
22.
23.

Height
Top Soil
Resistivity

24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.

Height
Soil bottom layer Type
Soil bottom layer Resistivity
Soil bottom layer Height
Level of fault in relation to earth S f
Increase in fault level Cp

0.2 m
Moist layer
130 hm. Meter
2m
Semi Moist soil
200 .m
infinity
60
100

146